trump n proletariat

 (Lost In Translation)

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Represenatives, has expressed the opinion that Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden should not attend televised debates with Donald Trump.

She elaborated: "Did you see the way Donald Trump tried to physically intimidate Hillary Clinton during the 2016 debates? It was disgraceful. Donald Trump is not worthy of a debate. My personal opinion is that Joe Biden should not debate him."

Ah yes.

The old physical intimidation gag.

Al Gore, then Presidential candidate for the Democratic Party tried it at a debate with the Bushwhacker in the year 2000 with vaguely risible results. Mr Bush looked at him bemusedly as Gore sauntered up. Gore tried to stare him down. Mr B gave a curt nod and continued with his remarks. The commentator Mark Steyn remarked at the time: "One thing is sure. If there's a fight, bet on the wiry little guy (Steyn meant Bush) rather than on the big Ox."

Nancy Pelosi expressed no outrage at the time, but perhaps she was less offended by an attempt at physical stalking and intimidation of a candidate on a debate stage when it was her guy doing it.

Some years later I found the Trump use of Al Gore's old gambit via his own attempts to menace Hillary highly comical rather than overtly offensive. Actually in any menacing intimidatory contact between Trump and Hillary my concern would be solely for Trump.

(Heelers, one of mine surely, ie "If Harold got bitten by a snake Sir, in those circumstances my concern would be solely for the snake." - PG Wodehouse note)

(Homage - Heelers note)

The Trump Hillary debate dance of death also provided inspiration for one of the few really nearly funny sketches on the Saturday Night Live television show in the past forty years of blandness, with Alec Baldwin as Trump stalking a really good looking version of Hillary (She was played by an actress called Kate McKinnon) around a debate stage to the accompaniment of the Jaws movie theme tune.

The plain English language translation of Mrs Pelosi's suggestion that Biden doesn't need to debate Trump because Trump is unworthy of debate, is: "Biden shouldn't debate Trump because Biden can't put two words together and Trump will eat him alive."

That is what she really meant and that paradoxically for a demmycrat is actually the truth.

I've nothing against Mr Biden regarding his supposed lack of verbal skills. I liked legendary (No, he was real - Ed note) Ronald Reagan, the great communicator, who managed to become President quite late in his political life when his ability to communicate wasn't as acuitive as it once had been. I seem to remember him welcoming Princess Diana to a dinner at the Whtie House as "Princess David." Princess Diana looked a bit nonplussed. Still none of his occasional verbal faux passes seemed to prevent Reagan from being the key figure in stiffening European and American resolve during the Cold War and eventually bringing down the Soviet Union. (By the grace of God, I believe.)

I also rated the Bushwhacker as the among the best of Presidents, and his brilliance was never overtly evidenced in word play.

I often ruminate wryly that without Bush, the Gadaffis in Libay would still have that A Bomb programme which no one knew about but which they surrendered voluntarily when the Bushwhacker took out Saddam Hussein's murderocracy in Iraq. I wonder what possible use the Gadaffis could have made of a few A bombs during the recent ouster of their government. We'll never know. Thanks to President George W Bush. Just in case some of y'all forgot.

So downgrading Mr Biden because he's not that slick on the verbals, don't impress me much.

Surely there are some more insightful perspectives from which to criteek him.

His son Hunter's billion dollar business deals in China and Ukraine, anybody?

Hello.

Still the reason Mrs Pelosi is telegraphing a Biden pull out from the debates is what it is. You've got to imagine her urging Biden in the voice of Burgess Meredith the coach from the Rocky films: "You can't fight this guy Joe. He'll kill you to death."

He will.

Unless the ref is working for Rocky.

Meanwhile President Trump's personal adviser Kelly Anne Svengali has resigned from his campaign.

"I am resigning to look after my family," she told reporters.

The plain English translation of this is: "I am a talented woman with a bad hairdo leaving a sinking ship.

Saturday Night Live had another amost funny sketch, this time about Kelly Anne after the 2016 elections with the actress portraying her as a dipsomaniac genius, guilt ridden for getting Trump elected (It was Kate McKinnon again) and declaring in a soliloquy: "My soul is as dead as my hair."

It was actually funny. Not mean. Funny.

But then they started hating Trump so much that the humour attending on their pieces simply evaporated.

We're about a month from the next election.

The dirty tricks have started.

The annual forest fire Jihad season has begun with Muslim terrorist group Al Qaeda and attendent coteries of murderers lighting forest fires across America while the media romanically insists it's the climate trying to burn the whole thing down.

Interestingly enough activist Reza Aslan has used the phrase "burn the whole thing down," advising people to strenuously protest should Trump appoint another Supreme Court Judge.

Presumably Reza is advocating burning down something other than America's forests, since his fellow travellers among Al Qaeda and the climate, as well as Putin's proxy radicals who I'm just sure exist, along with sundry devil worship cults and who knows who else, are already attending to the woods and the trees.

Oh the humanity.

I mean the timber.

And lo!

Unidentified entities are staging riots in American cities.

The people are identifiable but the organisation behind them is a tad arcane.

Vladdie the Pute again? The Chinese Communist Party Politbureau? 

A magazine styling itself The Atlantic has published a made up (ie unattributed) claim that Mr Trump once referred to dead American soldiers as losers.

Joe Biden found his tongue and indeed became quite eloquent after this nonsense slander, demanding with strange high passionate dignity that Trump apologise to the troops for what the Atlantic had made up about him.

The intent by the Atlantic and Joe is to slander Trump out of a couple of percentage points in the popular vote.

Ho hum.

I've a hundred Euro bet with Padre Baines that Trump will lose in the November elections.

Padre Baines is refusing to up the bet to a thousand.

At least with a thousand Euro bet, I'd notice I'd had a bet.

Tensions are rising.

This week a good burgher from the town of Kilcullen asked me what I thought of President Trump.

I began to weigh her question thusly: "There is an interesting situation in popular discourse. Many people don't feel free to answer that question honestly. Or they feel they have to answer it in a particular way to satisfy certain criteria of acceptability set by amoral Third parties such as bankrupt atheistic abortionist media groups like the Irish Times, Independent Newspapers or Ireland's Stalinist State broadcaster RTE. This can't be healthy."

She said: "Just tell me what you think of him."

I said: "I have no brief for those who are unfair in their assessment. I want to assess his Presidency sincerely. When I express an opinion or an assessment to you or to anyone else, I don't feel a need to justify myself first to the Bolshevicks of the Irish Times. So for a start..."

She said: "Stop dodging the question."

I said: "When he came to power I advised that those criticising him among his formal opponents and the media should be scrupulously fair but they went about the business of slandering him in exactly the same way they've done for any other non left wing political leader of the past half century in Ireland, Britain, America, Canada or Australia."

She said: "I want to know what you think of him. Give me a straight answer."

I said: "This is a straight answer. These are my thoughts about him. I'm giving you context for my assessment."

She said: "I didn't ask you for any information except what do you think of Donald Trump."

I said: "This is my answer. I'm weighing up first the situation whereby leftists and Demmycrats are demonising him. I am attempting then to critique him clearly using whatever faculties I have. I'm saying my initial concerns about his links to the Cosa Nostra mafia and the illusory nature of his claimed fortune, and his frivolous use of pejoratives against President Bush who led us through the first years of the World Jihad War, were..."

She said: "You probably like him because he's opposed to abortion."

I said: "I certainly think the sanctity of life is the most important issue on the planet and if I thought he was in any way sincere in defence of the unborn, or opposing euthanasia or forbidding assisted suicide, you're quite right, I'd be very impressed. More than I could be impressed by any other issue."

She said: "So you do like him."

I said: "I didn't say that. To begin with you've to look at whether the primary criticisms of him are answerable. Some are. The bit where they tried to run him out of the race in 2016 by misreporting his statement that John McCain was not a war hero. They misreported it by omitting context, by deliberately omitting to point out that Mr Trump said this after John McCain said Trump's supprters were crazies and after interviewer Frank Luntz attempted to prevent Trump from responding robustly to the charge that his supporters were crazies by stating: John McCain said your supporters are crazies and he's a war hero. It was in that context only that Mr Trump said ah he's not a war hero. Perfectly justifiable bit of badinage. But perfectly unjustifiable for any leftist or incompetent media group to report it without telling the full story of the initial provocation. Even comparatively decent journalists apparently didn't feel the need to note what exactly Mr Trump was responding to or the cirumstances in which he gave his response. You see..."

She said: "Oh James, I give up. You just won't give me a straight answer."